I agree vw does have a nice 800 miles per tank thing going but in reading consumer reports they were amazed by how slow to 60 the car is - its 10 seconds to 60. ( I think the one they tested was auto). Diesel is something we should move forward on - torque - and Mpgs but in order to tickle my fancy they need to go- which I believe BMW 335 diesel has this pull we are looking for but I would need stick and awd as an option living in the north east.

I don't know how old the test is, but I just recently drove a 2012 Golf TDI 6-Speed manual and it was more like an eight second to sixty car (VW's published number is 8.6 seconds); no where near as slow as ten seconds.

shipo: My Aunt & Uncle live in Southern, NH (Salem), very close to you. You also know I have a tremendous amount of respect for your opinion and vast knowledge, especially when it comes to all things automotive. You guys get some serious snow. Much more than we do here in Stamford, CT. I've lived in NY all my life (Rockland, Ithaca, Manhattan, Westchester) and much like MA & NH, they plow & salt. Early and often.

I thought the weather here in Stamford would be exactly the same as in Southern Westchester (Hartsdale, White Plains) where I had moved from. I was very much mistaken. Now I will admit that we had a "bad winter" last year as far as snowfall goes. Here in Stamford, I live off The Merrit Parkway and many people have well water, so they DO NOT salt the roads. They also don't send the plows out like they do in NY. I've got to be at work at 7:30 AM. That means leaving at 6:30 on normal days and between 6:00 & 6:15 when it snows. Last year I saw a few times that they had done a few passes on The Merrit, but didn't plow the entrance/exit ramps. I actually followed a plow on the the parkway thinking I'd be able to get off at the next exit and turn around. Well, I had to drive 10 miles North to Norwalk before I could turn around and come back south. This was all in my 2001 Honda Prelude equipped with a set of Michelin Pilot Arctic Alpin winter tires.

I think AWD with a set of 4 snow tires would have helped me plow through some of those unplowed on ramps and made my life easier.

For years I thought AWD/4WD was not needed in the "tri-state" area. That RWD and a set of winter tires would be all my whatever bmw I was building online would need. AWD adds weight & cost. It hampers fuel economy & performance for the other 355 days a year that it doesn't snow. AWD helps you start, but the added weight can be your enemy trying to swerve around something and increased your stopping distance. After spending 1 (bad) winter here in Stamford (southwestern CT for those who are unfamiliar with the area), my tune has changed.

Ahh, sorry. We test-drove a Passat TDI 6-Speed as well; not as quick as the Golf, but it did feel quicker than ten seconds to sixty. That said, I believe the 2.0 TDI is a bit under powered for a car the size of the Passat.

Diesels feel quick until you reach the revvs above the band and it "dies" very quickly. This means you have to shift a lot very precise shift points - this will impact acceleration number like 0-60. However, highway acceleration numbers (like 45 mph-60 mph, or 50-70 mph) usually are very good with diesels and make them feel quick and powerful.

2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.
Not a native speaker, but:
it's = it is, its = possessive for it (this one drives me particularly crazy - why is it so hard for people who were born and raised in this language?) , they're = they are, their = possessive for they, here = not there, hear = receive and interpret sound waves

I loved your post, but I must take exception to something kind of buried in your prose, to wit:

"It hampers fuel economy & performance. . ."

I don't really want to get into a discussion about the merits of AWD vs RWD or FWD or the difference between 2 driven and 4 driven wheels -- however, therefore, notwithstanding (and any other lawyer-ly sounding thing), I do agree that AWD done poorly can hamper performance. I agree that typically (meaning virtually always in fact) the added weight of AWD does decrease fuel mileage.

Yet we don't live (or at least most of us don't live) in a perfect world with respect to driving -- if we did, I suspect virtually everyone would agree that RWD at least ought to be the best.

Assuming we all accept the premise that our driving world is imperfect, I would submit that AWD generally speaking (and with the qualifier that I am speaking about AWD done well, such as by Audi, BMW and Infiniti, wherein the AWD is rear biased and may include torque vectoring or what is sometimes called a sport differential) performs better in the real world.

My premise is that AWD is not just about driving in the snow and on other low coefficient of friction surfaces.

We can, if you like, agree to disagree and be done with it -- I just couldn't let the "hampers performance" remark stand since it seems too broad and perhaps would lead a newcomer to this forum to come to believe that only RWD is good and AWD sucks gas and decreases performance.

For a lot of folks, even in warmer areas of the country, AWD means the potential for greater perfomance in everyday driving circumstances.

Yup. It's a friend's 2012. Sapphire Black Metallic/Black Leather. He put the black BMW grill, and had the stock wheels powder coated. He also had all the chrome trim on the truck powder coated. He left all the Roundels blue & the /// stripes on the M badge in color. It is one of the most unique looking X5s I've ever seen. He's on his 2nd. His 1st was a 2010 X5 ///M in Silverstone/Black.

Just to expand on this a bit, AWD hampers performance IN SOME WAYS (more weight will always do that), but gains in back in others. The SCCA, at least, acknowledges that AWD is an overall performance benefit, thereby putting the 227-hp WRX in the same class as the 300-hp 135i, and the 165-hp Impreza in the same class as the GTI, Civic Si, and V6 Genesis Coupe.

Sweeny the price of the car should not determine how fast it goes. If this was the case then the MB E350 Blue-Tech shouldn't be produce. BTW, the Lexus LS600 should be a fast car since its north of $125K... However there are other cars that are faster for less money.

Flight...Ok thanks - I understand that that is why I also mentioned in prev posts the mpg advantage - but I'm sorry 10 seconds for a sedan in the 30k range is slow- but that being said I'm sure it has plenty of midrange grunt.

FYI in less then 2 hrs Acura has a big announcement at the auto show in Detroit

Ok all my friends out there who track their cars on a regular basis or have driven cars on a track. I understand the basic idea of why RWD rocks (especially on the track). The front wheels steer the car while the rear wheels drive the car. RWD is lighter and less complex. You can oversteer the car if you want to.

How does the AWD car have such an advantage if it is heavier and has a tendency to understeer (although not as much as a FWD car)? I also know there are different types of AWD systems out there. BMW's X Drive is RWD based, Subaru's Symmetrical AWD (50/50 Split with a WRX Manual Transmission), Audi has 2 types of quattro (50/50 & the Rear Biased in their performance models).

This is a conversation that can only go down the wrong path. Tracking/racing the car is one thing, street driving is another.

The only reason I have AWD is I don't have to put on snows, and if I need snows, I'll put em on four wheels. The rest of the supposed benefits or disadvantages I don't really care about, because I'm not racing my daily driver. I'm trying to get back and forth to work safely.